CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

血流储备分数

Abstract

Recommended Article

Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Three-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 2 Trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography-Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI Real-world clinical utility and impact on clinical decision-making of coronary computed tomography angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: lessons from the ADVANCE Registry Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation Influence of Heart Rate on FFR Measurements: An Experimental and Clinical Validation Study

Review Article2013 Dec 5;170(1):54-63.

JOURNAL:Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Use of IVUS guided coronary stenting with drug eluting stent: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials and high quality observational studies

Klersy C, Ferlini M, Raisaro A et al. Keywords: IVUS guidance; DES implantation; MACE, mortality; MI

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES - Long term safety of DES, particularly regarding thrombosis is of concern. The hypothesized underlying mechanisms (stent under expansion, malapposition) could be prevented by IVUS guidance. Aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) and high quality observational cohort studies (HQ-OBS) is to quantify the potential clinical benefit of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance in drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation.


METHODS - We performed an extensive literature search for full-text articles published in 2003–2013. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in RCT and HQ-OBS; secondary outcomes were death, myocardial infarction (MI), revascularization, thrombosis and post-procedural minimum lumen diameter (MLD). Fixed/random effect relative risks (RRs) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were computed for the meta-analysis.


RESULTS - Thirty-four articles were retrieved from 268 found; of these 3 were RCT and 9 were HQ-OBS; 18,707 patients were enrolled, 1037 in RCT and 17,670 in OBS. Median follow-up was 20 months. IVUS guidance was associated with a significantly lower rate of MACE (RR=0.80, 95% CI 0.71–0.89, p b 0.001), death (RR=0.60, 95% CI 0.48–0.74, p b 0.001), MI (RR=0.59, 95% CI 0.44–0.80, p=0.001) and thrombosis (RR=0.50, 95% CI 0.32–0.80, p=0.007) and larger MLD (SMD=0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.27, p=0.014), but not of revascularization (RR=0.95, 95% CI 0.82–1.09, p=0.75).


CONCLUSIONS - In this meta-analysis, IVUS guidance in DES implantation appears to reduce MACE, mortality and MI, possibly by reducing thrombosis rather than restenosis rate. Patients at high risk for thrombosis might be identified as the best candidate for IVUS guidance.